I think that Putin really thinks that Russia faces an existential threat from an expanding NATO.
Ukraine never kept its promises in the Minsk accords that ended the fighting in 2014, and there has been periodic artillery shelling (comparable to what the Bosnians did to the Serbians, provoking a NATO attack) ever since.
Before Russia att…
I think that Putin really thinks that Russia faces an existential threat from an expanding NATO.
Ukraine never kept its promises in the Minsk accords that ended the fighting in 2014, and there has been periodic artillery shelling (comparable to what the Bosnians did to the Serbians, provoking a NATO attack) ever since.
Before Russia attacked, Ukraine was building up troops along the Donbass line of control, apparently preparing to invade. (I remember reading that the IMF insisted that Ukraine re-absorb the breakaway region, so the eastern ethnic Russians could be taxed to help pay the unpayble debt.)
Finally, Ukraine publicly floated the idea of getting nuclear weapons again, just before Russia attacked.
I think it is clear that "democracy" in Ukraine is a sham. It seems clear that both neo-Nazi thugs in the streets and support from the USA were necessary for the 2014 coup/revolution to succeed. The neo-Nazis were put in charge of security, and nobody was punished for the Odessa Barbecue that terrorized the people throughout the country. Two pro-Russia politicians got killed, and nobody was punished.
It seems to me that the American leadership, in the White House and in both parties in both houses of Congress (and fully supported by the mainstream news media) is marching toward a nuclear war that we would probably lose, because of Russia's temporary advantage in military technology.
My assessment is that, if the American leadership remains unreasonably hostile to Putin's seemingly reasonable demands (for example, no re-run of the Cubsn missile crisis), Russia will not hesitate to (for example) declare that sanctions against Russia's banking sector are acts of war and launch a nuclear attack whenever they think it is to their strategic advantage.
I think that Putin really thinks that Russia faces an existential threat from an expanding NATO.
Ukraine never kept its promises in the Minsk accords that ended the fighting in 2014, and there has been periodic artillery shelling (comparable to what the Bosnians did to the Serbians, provoking a NATO attack) ever since.
Before Russia attacked, Ukraine was building up troops along the Donbass line of control, apparently preparing to invade. (I remember reading that the IMF insisted that Ukraine re-absorb the breakaway region, so the eastern ethnic Russians could be taxed to help pay the unpayble debt.)
Finally, Ukraine publicly floated the idea of getting nuclear weapons again, just before Russia attacked.
I think it is clear that "democracy" in Ukraine is a sham. It seems clear that both neo-Nazi thugs in the streets and support from the USA were necessary for the 2014 coup/revolution to succeed. The neo-Nazis were put in charge of security, and nobody was punished for the Odessa Barbecue that terrorized the people throughout the country. Two pro-Russia politicians got killed, and nobody was punished.
It seems to me that the American leadership, in the White House and in both parties in both houses of Congress (and fully supported by the mainstream news media) is marching toward a nuclear war that we would probably lose, because of Russia's temporary advantage in military technology.
My assessment is that, if the American leadership remains unreasonably hostile to Putin's seemingly reasonable demands (for example, no re-run of the Cubsn missile crisis), Russia will not hesitate to (for example) declare that sanctions against Russia's banking sector are acts of war and launch a nuclear attack whenever they think it is to their strategic advantage.
copy, paste, repeat...
Of the three times that I posted my assessment, each one was seen by different people.
Professional, right?
Professional truck driver, I have an honest job
As opposed to what? Dishonest jobs?
There are professional positions where adherence to pre-established Ideological positions is necessary for job security.
I cannot subscribe to that line of thinking, nor is it a reason to take one particular stance ideologically
Couldn't resist. John, nobody wins a nuclear war. It saddens me how conspiracies warp thinking; I do wish you well.
Brad Christo, you continue to subtly sneer without engaging with what I said.